Education policy leaders from across the political spectrum identified and evaluated four models that national standards and testing could take. These models are: (1) "The Whole Enchilada," the most direct and aggressive approach in which the federal government creates and enforces national standards and assessments, replacing the current 50 state-level sets of standards and tests; (2) "If You Build It, They Will Come," a voluntary version of the first model--The government would develop national standards, tests and accountability metrics, and provide incentives to states to opt into such a system. A variant would have a private group frame the standards. Either way, participation would be optional for states; (3) "Let's All Hold Hands," an approach in which states would be encouraged to join together to develop common standards and tests--The government might only provide incentives for collaboration; and (4) "Sunshine and Shame," the least ambitious model would render state standards and tests more transparent by making them easier to compare to one another and to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). This paper outlines how each model might work out in practice, and it evaluates the likelihood that each would model: (1) end the "race to the bottom"; (2) result in rigorous standards instead of merely politically acceptable ones; (3) expand Washington's role in education; and (4) prove politically feasible. Appended are: (1) Contributors; and (2) Questions Asked of Contributors. (Contains 1 figure.) ["To Dream the Impossible Dream: Four Approaches to National Standards and Tests for America's Schools" was written with contributions from Eli Broad, Cynthia Brown, Michael Cohen, Robert Gordon, Frederick M. Hess, Gene Hickok, Sandy Kress, James Peyser, Diane Ravitch, Andrew Rotherham, Suzanne Tacheny, and Bob Wise.]